In remarks delivered in Denver on Moday, presumptive Democrat nominee John Kerry proclaimed: "If Bangalore and India can be completely wired, then so should all of Colorado and all of America." For sure.

But at least one consulting group based in India begs to differ. According to a January 2004 report from Nagendra Technology Consulting, the Indian Broadband Era started somewhere in late 1999 when DSL/cable was introduced. "Now in it's 5th year of services things still seem bleak, but the market has been rapidly expanding in numbers even if not in quality." The report goes on to state that: "Although most providers wire you up with modems or connections capable of reaching in excess of 10 mbps, the actual bandwidth that is usuable is still very limited and capped by the provider within 128 kbps, and cost dramatically for 512 kbps if available as an option."

Completely wired? I guess it depends on what the definition of "completely" is and the definition of "wired" is. Isn't that so?

USA Today leads the Money section with the tech sector's increasing political sophistication.

The political sector's response: What took you so long?

Last week, NARUC President Stan Wise testified at the Senate Commerce Committee hearing on the VoIP Regulatory Freedom Act of 2004. He took the opportunity to trot out the tired argument of regulators everywhere: We regulate telephones; VoIP service looks like telephone service. Ipso facto, we should regulate VoIP too.

Wise calls for regulation based on the "functional nature" of a service. By this standard, any service that includes voice is fair game for state officials. Look out wireless. Look out cable. Look out BPL. More useful would be an examination of the underlying networks and economic forces at work in a given market. Compare this with the following from Wise's testimony: "If the physical structure of a particular service makes its carrier unable to exert market power, for example, that may impact whether the full panoply of economic regulation should apply."

Wise gives voice to the opinion of state officials who advocate a default position of "the full panoply of economic regulation." Such was the case in New York where a recent VoIP decision of the NY PSC lumped Vonage in with traditional telecom providers. At the time I predicted, "the decision will become a rhetorical feather to the cap of the pro-regulation folks." Sadly, Wise has made an honest man of me.

Chairman Billy Tauzin once explained to me that politics is something that we all know about; and then there is something called Louisiana Politics. The implication is that very few people really know much about politics and how they work down in the bayou.

I'll take him at his word. In spite of my travels to state capitals around the country, All the King's Men would not be enough to help me follow the legislative process in Baton Rouge. Thus I was pleasantly surprised to see that SB 877 has been sent on to Governor Kathleen Blanco for consideration. As introduced, the legislation closely matched model legislation developed by the ALEC task force on information technology and telecommunications. While PFF was not an active participant in the debate, through research and publication we were not simply bystanders either. Various parties to the legislative debate have made use of our research on municipal telecommunications providers throughout the last month.

According to Communications Daily, the compromises inherent to the process of lawmaking did not dilute the essence of the bill. CommDaily reports that the bill would require PSC obligations on the private sector to apply to local governments that enter the telecommunications marketplace. It seems only fitting. If anyone has made a careful analysis of the legislation, I invite you to email me your thoughts.

"If it ain't broke, then don't fix it," they say.

But if it is, then do. My piece in today's CNET, "How to Reform the FCC," argues it is time to fix the FCC, which if not broke, is ailing. I'm talking some serious instituional reform.

Scalpel please! And transplant tools too. Let's get this patient to the operating table.

The local newspaper has a story today on the movement to mandate cable "a la carte pricing." The mandate, championed by Senator McCain and various "consumer" groups, would have government require cable be turned into a tapas bar -- small, expensive portions -- instead of its current, all-American "all-you-can eat" packaging. The story is slightly sympathetic to the a la carte side of the story. Still, no one has better addressed the underlying economic issue than Stuart Buck, who eloquently explains bundling as a means to effectuate price discrimination, a necessary move in a high fixed, low marginal cost industry.

Cablevision plans to offer free phone service along with its broadband and television package. Remind me, what was all that unbundling hubbub about?

But I eagerly await the first consumer advocate to demand Cablevision offer this free phone "a la carte" instead of in a package.